On Feb 6, 2007, at 3:56 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote: > Hi all > > With regards to the NFS anonymizer that I am working on currently, I > was > wondering, whether a feature like multiple dissectors for single > protocol would be a good idea. > > Mainly, the idea is that there can be a pipeline or a queue of > dissectors for the same protocol but only one of them has the > capability/right/priority to update or access the wireshark/tshark UI.
No dissector has any right to do anything directly with the *shark UI; they only have the right to construct summary display information and protocol trees, and to register preferences and dissectors. > This particular UI-attached dissector could then either be > user-selectable or selected from the pipeline based on some other > conditions. Why would you want to choose from one of multiple dissectors, instead of having a single dissector that does the right thing, or that has preferences to control what it does? Note: anonymizing packets isn't what a dissector does; a dissector dissects packets. If you want hooks to do anonymization that understands particular protocols, the way to do that would be to add hooks for anonymization, rather than trying to abuse the protocol dissection mechanism and being then forced into adding more mechanism to all ow that sort of abuse. So what sort of hooks into the *existing* dissectors do you need in order to do anonymization? _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
